galitsos Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Hello,Regarding only scanning trannies 6X6 cm and 4X5" which one would you choose and why? (except price) because if I add the Silverfast Ai that in F3200 is included I think that they have almost equal price.Thanks for another time.George Galitsos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattb1 Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 For 4x5 you don't have many choices. Personally I found that Epson flatbeds could not scan a 4x5 anywhere near the quality that I wanted out of LF, or MF either. So, you may want to re-evaluate if an Epson is what you really want. If at all possible see if you can scan some examples on these machines and see if they can actually do what you want. Otherwise, you could end up like me. The excitement of being able to digitize MF and LF wears off pretty quickly when you realize that the files are not the quality you want. That being said, LF scanning and even MF scanning can be prohibitively expensive. If you do 90 or 95% MF then IMO you may be much better off buying a used MF film scanner, such as a Polaroid or Minolta if the funds are in short supply. Good art can be done with an Epson, but I found the hard way they could not even come close to what I wanted to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtk Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 It's true that many users have never mastered their flatbed scanners (just as it's true that many who comment on them have never used them) but the same applies to dedicated film scanners. For example, the Nikon 9000 may not deliver its best without glass carrier, and may not do well on B&W without Vuescan. Be cautious about that F3200 ... the one review I've read has indicated that it's not better than the 4990, may not even equal. Silverfast Ai may be a good thing, but I've seen no suggestion that it's better than Vuescan, a very inexpensive alternative (some do like special aspects of one Vs the other). Djon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
galitsos Posted June 4, 2005 Author Share Posted June 4, 2005 Thank you both. I'm using an Epson 3200 (not F) and for MF I'm thinking seriously the Nikon 9000. As for LF my budget allows me (at least for the present time) something like the 4990. Enjoy your explorations in the wonderful photoworld. George. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3d-aeropanoramic project Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 with 4990 and scanmax-wet-scan-holder you can produce 12-15x enlargements of very good quality. when using epsons new sensational 4800 printer you will not have to enlarge more than 11x getting 40x60cm prints from hassicam. (4.5x6)if you use colornegatives and have light or/and filmdevelopment control you will get the best out of it. if contrast is a problem i would even prefog my panoramic films. i do 360-panwork. if you take your time in doing that homework it would be easy getting all the contrast onto the paper. i use jobo rotating-machine cpa2. even if you cannot develop yourself, prefogging is not that difficult. register in scanmax-yahoo-mailllist and you can see(in the files) difference between standard and wetscan-print. its like day and night. all scratches and dust is gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3d-aeropanoramic project Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 i have comparison prints here of a very sharp original colornegative: a) epson 2450(20x enlarged)b) 4990( 12x enlarged). on new 4990-even without special holder- details of 0.01 mm on film are resolved. film laying flat on glass.2450 scan(same scan-procedure with no holder)is clearly inferior. of course-since it has been said to enlarge only 8x as max. i would looking forward the day when i can even prove that scanmax-wet-scan-holder will produce even better results. 12-15x is only my estimation. maybe we can go higher when using scanmax-method of julio fernandez. alternative is doug fishers mf-holder also with glass-option. 4x5 and exotic sizes announced on his website. my 180 degrees-panoramashot could be 76 x300cm printed on chromira-machine. then we could check sharpness in all parts of the negative. center and corners produce the same top-quality since my pancams are using rotating-slits(covering only the center of very sharp zeiss-lens). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sl attanapola Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 Amateur Photographer gave it a good review. http://www.amateurphotographer.com/equipment/review/Epson_F3200_11019.php There is an earlier thread on this too: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CMFU&unified_p=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3d-aeropanoramic project Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 new link to scanmax-wetmounting-filmholder or scanning-list http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WETMOUNTING/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now